Doesn’t have to be about over traumatic-related things, but just in general, things you don’t like talking about. Whether it’ll bum you down, distract you or vice versa.
I don’t like talking about work, my job and how the week went. All it’ll do and has done, is make me dread of upcoming work weeks even during my time off. I hate being asked the typical question “how was your day at work?” any other time. Because the answer is just going to be unsatisfying and I get annoyed even having to answer that question. It’s not that I’m hiding anything, it’s just that it’s fucking work and it is the same damn thing every night. I put up with stupid fucking people, even dumber co-workers and I work in a system that is massively ungrateful for what you do for it.
That’s all you’ll ever need to know about it, so stop trying to get me to talk about that shit.
This just in: New evidence suggests some people think before making a decision? We’ll tell you what this means for your weekend at 11.
Now what I want to see is if M1 neurons begin to show increased activity before someone thinks about getting up to go pee, but decides to hold it in. Because if so, it’s pretty clear that the decision making process simply involves motor neurons readying themselves in case they’re needed. But if they don’t, then it means the motor cortex is contributing to the decision making process, and that’s an actually informative result.
Well, now I’m curious as well. If I only kind of have to pee, like I just noticed it, it feels entirely voluntary to hold it, but if I really have to pee, it does feel like one one part of my brain is sending “pee now” signals that another part of my brain, the conscious decision-making part, has to fight against, which makes me think they have to get involved in the decision somehow. Maybe that physical motor control fight just is how those two parts of the brain mediate each other. Neat.
And what we’re doing right now is good science. We’re operationalising our variables and making testable predictions, deciding what the possible results could mean before we conduct the experiment and see them.
Saying “Neuron activity before a decision is made disproves free will” is bad science, because “free will” is being implicitly operationalised in a very opinionated way, and it’s not exactly clear what the experimenter thinks a null hypothesis result would look like.
I don’t think neuroscience can tell us whether free will exists, because “free will” is too difficult to operationalise in a way everyone would agree with. For example, many people think if our actions are predetermined based on our environment, it means no free will. But I think if our actions are random, that’s not free will, and predetermined actions would make Me feel much freer. I want to know that My mind behaves consistently, that makes Me feel in control. Many disagree. This disagreement can’t be resolved with science.